Ethics and religion in Things Fall Apart
When faced with a decision to end someone's life, where you have to choose between ethics or religion, what will sway someone to choose one over the other? In “Things Fall Apart” , one of the main underlying themes is religion and how it affects each person differently. Since the book is based in Nigeria, the people of the village don’t practice a judeo-christian religion, rather they follow the religion Igbo. Igbo is a plytheistic belief system, where the people rely on Gods for the well being of the family and food of its followers. Christianity on the other hand, only conceptualizes one God and they base their ethical choices on religion. In the Bible story “Binding of Isaac”, Abraham is faced with a difficult decision; God tells him to kill his son Isaac (Binding of Isaac). In the eyes of the philosopher Kierkegaard, this sacrifice though horrific and unethical, is justified because of religious matters. In his eyes, even the most agreed upon religious convictions, lose their meaning when facing God (Hollander 1). God is testing Abraham's obedience to him, and never had the intentions of sacrificing his son as he had a substitute to sacrifice instead. But Abraham did not know about this substitute, making his actions an ethical rupture. Why have a relationship with your beloved son when you can have a relationship to God? Kierkegaard argued that this standpoint of raw violence is horrific and even questioned “What good is fate” when fate can overthrow the love of your closest family and the need to satisfy your God is more important than anything else (Hollander 2). Just like Abraham's story, in Things Fall Apart Okonkwo is faced with a similar situation; he must kill his adoptive son. Okonkwo is told by one of the leaders of the village that the fate of Ikemefuna after living in the village for three years is death, and he must be killed by the one that calls him father. Although advised not to, in fear of his reputation Okonkwo goes own with the act and kills the boy. Though, unlike like Abraham, Okonkwo did not have any religious backing and killed him purley for the sake of his reputation. Kierkegaard might have understood the potential killing of Isaac because although ethically wrong, it was religiously correct because God told him to do so. Kierkegaard would not agree with Ikemefuna's death because Okonkwo broke one of the most important unwritten ethical rules and had no reasoning behind it other then he didn’t want to appear as weak. Abraham had to choose between the acceptance of God or the life of his son, while Okonkwo had to choose between the acceptance of mortals or the life of a son. Kierkegaard would also have been both amazed, and distraught by the fact the Okonkwo only felt remorse for a little bit, but then convinced himself that he shouldn’t feel remorse because the death was completely justifiable. Through the Kierkegaard teleological suspension of the ethical, Abraham's sacrifice was ethical because it had religious backing, while Okonkwo's sacrifice was more of a teleological suspension of the unethical because there was no religious backing to his actions. Many years after this incident, the village was being converted to Christianity by the Europeans who were taking over the village. Most people succumbed to this acclimation and accepted that there was not multiple Gods, rather only one God. Kierkegaard explained this as a Christian evolution more related to hegelianism (Theology of Søren Kierkegaard). The Christians did not want the Africans to become more religious, rather they wanted them to stop believing in many Gods and try to base their actions on rationale. The Christians in the book, and Kierkegaard, argued that religion did not have to make sense, but they still needed to follow it. Although most people in the village decided to convert to Christainity, one of the few people who decided not to convert was of course - Okonkwo. Okonkwo did not want to convert because he believed in his religion of Igbo and wasn’t going to convert just because he is told to. This lack of conversion brings up the question, why would anyone choose to suffer when they could easily make a choice to end this suffering? Okonkwo chose to suffer from the Christians because unlike the people who converted, he still believed in his Gods. It can also be argued that Okonkwo is being more Christians then the Christians themselves because he is still following religion and not converting based on fear. Surprisingly, in this situation, Kierkegaard would agree with Okonkwo by not converting. Kierkegaard believed in the philosophy that life is not worth living unless you believe in a God and have total faith in a God. So by not converting to Christianity it shows that Okonkwo still has faith in his Gods, unlike the others who switch their faiths based on others.